From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: simon@mungewell.org Subject: Re: HID: hid-logitech - missing HID_OUTPUT_REPORT 0 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:35:48 -0400 Message-ID: <796aa99e55f8812aa6422d35610d4ed3.squirrel@mungewell.org> References: <6452400bfacafd7e1f0d0f7a98b06248.squirrel@mungewell.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: Received: from host171.canaca.com ([67.55.55.225]:47622 "EHLO host171.canaca.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751001AbaDQQfu (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:35:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Kees Cook Cc: linux-input , Jiri Kosina , Elias Vanderstuyft > I don't know the lg driver very well, but it looks like it's expecting > a single report ID (0), but the device is showing two report IDs: 1 > and 2. So, from the perspective of the driver, this is correct: it > wouldn't know how to deal with things since it is only expecting > Report ID 0. It seems like the driver needs to be updated for this > different device. Hi, The 'hid-lgff.c' driver supports lots of devices (see end of 'hid-lg.c'), and presumably these devices offer up a wide/varied range of HID descriptors. Does the recently introduced(/changed) check need to have prior knowledge of which 'Report ID's are actually used? If so, it possible that the change has broken a number of devices... I am trying to get the end user to test with an older kernel to see whether his device was always 'broken'. Thanks. Simon